The Teaching of the Ritualists not the Teaching of the Church
of England

Church Association Tract 4

Revd. John Charles Ryle D.D.

The Ritualists have two devices which it is well to notice.

First, they represent themselves as Catholics, and say they are
eager to revive the traditions and worship of the Primitive Church. This
representation is contrary to the fact. The Church of England took that course
at her Reformation; all that was pure, primitive, and Catholic, both in worship,
faith, and order, she retained. She cast off only the fictions, idolatry, and
error by which Roman Priest-craft and Italian ambition had disfigured the
Apostolic faith.

But the Reformation and the works of our Reformed Church is
denounced by Ritualists as mutilated, Antichristian, and a pestilent heresy,
while, in fact, the Ritualists are merely reintroducing the ceremonies and
dogmas which our fathers cast off as idolatrous and superstitious. When
therefore they call themselves Catholics, they mean Romanists.

Their second device, when they meet their countrymen, is to disguise
and cloak their opinions. They appeal to that just sentiment which prevails,
the desire to reclaim and instruct the masses.

They represent themselves as devoted to this duty. Whereas, when you
watch their acts and visit their churches, you find them doing the work of
Roman priests, endeavouring by appeals to remorse, by demands for confession,
by offers of absolution, by sacrifices of masses, by urging of prayers to
Saints and the Virgin, by appeals to the senses, music, incense, shows and
dresses, to allure to Church the frivolous, careless, and dissipated. The
result of this is, what it is in all European countries where Rome prevails, to
bring power, repute, and gifts to the priest; to leave unchanged the vices and
appetites of the people.

Ritualism then is in its faith and forms Romanism; and, in order not
to misrepresent it, we shall take its own organs to describe its practices, and
learn its words and ways from its tracts, magazines, catechisms, manuals of
devotion, and the newspapers, which the Ritualists publish.

1. They declare that the doctrine of Rome and England is the
same,1 they attend the Roman mass,2 and recommend others to do the same3 and
they pray for union with the corrupt Church of Rome.4

1 “The breach between us and Rome is
not so wide as is commonly thought.”—Dr. Pusey's Eirenicon, p. 207.

“What I have said to the Gallican [i.e. Romish] Bishops, and what
they have clearly understood, is this, ‘that I believe the Council of Trent,
whatever its look may be, and our Articles, whatever their look may be, each
could be so explained as to be reconcilable one with the other.’” Speech by Dr.
Pusey, at Annual Meeting of the English Church Union, 1866. See E. C. U. Circular,
for July, 1866, p. 197.

“None but those who have reduced ignorance to a system, now deny
that the differences between the authoritative documents of Rome and England
are Infinitesimal—that the priesthood is the same, the Liturgy virtually the
same, and the doctrine the same.”—Church Times, June 18, 1869.

2 “We have attended mass in a hundred
great cities of the continent, and found out that there is not of necessity an
idol in every foreign Church; but that it is very possible to worship with a
Roman priest, and not only to receive no harm, but some good.”—Rev. W. J. E.
Bennett’s Essay on “Some Results of the Tractarian Movement of 1833,” in the
Church and the World, p. 19. 1867.

3 “If the traveller should assist at
Protestant worship, he is aiding and abetting that the doctrine, heresy, and
schism from which he prays in the Litany to be delivered. If he does go to the
Anglican chapel, he is nevertheless bound to be present at an early Mass in the
Roman parish church.”—Church News, July 7, 1889

4 “It is the distinct duty of all who
pray for the peace of Jerusalem to repudiate foreign Lutheranism, Calvinism,
&c., and to do their utmost to show that the English Church of which they are
members, is really one with the Church of Rome in faith, orders, and
sacraments; whilst the Protestant bodies are branches cut off from the True
Vine of which the Roman and Anglican and Eastern Communions are living
boughs.”—Church News, July 7, 1869.

“We had been chosen by God to be the colonists of all newly
discovered lands, and we stood, like Aaron, between the living and the
dead—between the living Church and the dead and decaying forms of a corrupt
Protestantism. We were bound to come forward with our message to both—to the living,
that they be not high-minded, but fear; to the dead, that they arise and return
to the pure bosom of their mother the Catholic Church.”—From Notice of Sermon
by Rev. Dr. Littledale on the Anniversary of the A. P. U. C. in the Church
Times, Sept. 10, 1869.

2. They revile Protestantism. They call it heresy,5 a pest,6 a
cancer,7 a monstrous figment,8 and they vilify the Reformation and the
Reformers9 in terms equally coarse;10 and yet they quietly remit in
incumbencies and curacies within the Church of the Reformation.

5 A writer in The Church and the
World (Ed. 1866, p. 237) says, “Our place is appointed among us Protestants,
and in a communion deeply tainted in its practical system by Protestant heresy,
but our duty is the expulsion of the evil, and not flight from it.”

“They (the ministers) carry on a school, and are indefatigable in
visiting the poor, and in infusing into the veins of an ignorant and
unsuspicious populace the poison of Protestant heresy.”

6 “Pest of Protestantism.”—Church
News, May 5th, 1869.

7 But we should much prefer seeing
attention centred on theological matters and questions of discipline, and
extirpating that ulcerous cancer of Protestantism, which must be fatal, sooner
or later, to any Church that does not use moral steel and fire upon it.”—Church
Times, Sept. 3, 1869.

8 “By way of protest against the
monstrous figment of Protestantism.”—Ibid.

“We are bound to correct one of the speakers [at the Islington
Clerical Meeting] who remarked that the Tractarian School, whatever its good
points may be, loses sight of the distinctive doctrines of the Reformation. We
do not lose sight of them at all. We are busy in hunting them down, and have no
intention of foregoing the chase till we have extirpated them. That is plain
speaking enough, we trust.”—Church Times, Jan. 28th, 1870.

9 “Anathema to the Principle of
Protestantism.”—Palmer’s Letter to Golightly.

10 Dr. Littledale, in his Lecture on
Innovations, calls the Reformers a set of miscreants, all utterly unredeemed
villains.

3. They propose to abandon, and labour for the abolition of,
the xxxix Articles of Religion,11 which “contain the true doctrine of the
Church of England agreeable to God’s Word.”

11 “First of all come the xxxix
Articles, those Protestant Articles, tacked on to Catholic Liturgy, those
forty-stripes-save-one, as some have called them, laid on the back of the
Anglican priesthood—How are they to be got over?”—Essay by Rev. L. Blenkinsopp
on “Reunion of the Church,” in the Church and the World, 1866, p. 202.

See proposal of Dr. Pusey that the Universities should abandon
subscription to the xxxix Articles as the practical qualification for orthodox
Church of England Protestant teaching, in Letter to the President of the
Wesleyan conference, 1868.

“It will soon become the duty of Churchmen to labour actively for
the abolition of the Articles, which have long ago done their work and are
really of extremely little use now, discrediting us (as they do) in the eyes of
foreign Catholics.”—Church News, July 29, 1868.

“We have never seen the use of retaining the Thirty-nine Articles at
all.”—Church Times, March 12th, 1869.

“The abolition of the Thirty-nine Articles, the adoption of Edward
VI. First Communion Office…would win for the Disestablished Church the respect
of Christendom.”—Church Times, Sep. 3rd. 1869.

4, They hold with the Church of Rome that there are seven
Sacraments,12 whereas our xxvth Article declares that there are two Sacraments
ordained of Christ in the Gospel—Baptism and the Lord’s Supper.

12 See Article on “The Seven
Sacraments,” in Tracts for the Day, edited by Rev. O. Shipley. In the Prayer
Book for the Young, or complete Guide to Public and Private Devotion for
youthful members of the English Church, “Confirmation,” Confession,”
“Visitation of the Sick,” “Holy Orders” and “Matrimony” are enumerated among
the Sacraments, p. 10.

Rev. Orby Shipley states in his “ Sermons on Sin ,” that “there are
seven Sacraments and personal extensions of the incarnation of God”—“Baptism,”
“Confirmation,” “Eucharist,” “Marriage,” “Orders,” “Extreme Unction,”
“Penance.” And he adds, “The seventh and last sacramental extension of the Incarnation
of our God, I need not tell you, my brethren, in theological language, is
termed the “Sacrament of Penance.”—pp. 43 to 50.

5. They pray to the Virgin Mary and elevate her to a throne in
heaven;13 and our Church declares such adoration to be superstitious and
idolatrous.

6. They pray to saints and invoke their intercession.14 Our
Church terms such prayers “repugnant to the Word of God.” (Art. xxii.) St. Paul
says there is “one Mediator between God and man.”—1 Tim. ii. 5.

7. They set up images of the Virgin and of the saints; and
introduce into their churches the Romish pictures of ‘the Twelve Stations of
the Cross’ and publish forms of prayer to be said at each Station,15 as in the
Roman Catholic Church; whereas our Church warns us that images “if they be
publicly suffered in churches will lead to idolatry.” (Art. xxxv, and Homily against
Peril of Idolatry)

15 See Decorations in Ritualistic
Churches—St. Michael’s and All Angels, Shoreditch, and others.

See the ‘Way of the Cross’ in the Treasury of Devotion, pp. 191 to
200.

8. They pervert the Communion Table into an Altar, the
Communion into a Mass, and the Clergyman into a sacrificing Priest, who
elevates material elements incorporating the Deity, and direct these to be
adored by the worshipper with genuflection and prostration;16 whereas our
Church declares that the Mass “overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament” (Art. xxviii),
and that such worship is “idolatry, to be abhorred of all faithful Christians.”
(Communion Service.)

16 “This prayer we say (to use the
word common to us all) in the Mass which we now offer in many places daily on
our altars.”—Rev. W. J. E. Bennett’s Essay. “Some Results of the Tractarian

Movement of 1833” in the Church and the World. p. 19. 1867.

“Grant that the Sacrifice, which I a miserable sinner have offered
before Thy Divine Majesty may be acceptable unto Thee, and through thy mercy
maybe a propitiation for me, and all for whom I have offered It.”—Priest’s
Prayer Book, p. 13.

“Now kneel upright, your hands clasped upon your breast; follow the
Priest in silent awe, for Jesus thy God is very nigh thee, he is about to
descend upon the altar, surrounded by the Fire of the Holy Ghost, and attended
by the angels. At the Consecration and Elevation prostrate yourself to the dust
and say, ‘Hail Body of my God hail Body of my Redeemer—I adore—I adore—I adore
thee.”— Manual of Devotions and Directions Members of the Church of England,
intended especially the Young.

9. They enjoin the reservation of the Sacrament of the Lord’s
Supper, whereas our xxxviiith Article says:—“The Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper
was not by Christ’s ordinance reserved, carried about, lifted up, or
worshipped.

“Celebration in private rooms should be avoided as much as possible.
For this purpose it is well to have the Blessed Sacrament reserved in the
church (where this may be done), but especially in collegiate and monastic
chapels, where it should always be reserved. The priest should, on due notice
being given, carry it from thence in the pyx (in both kinds of course), to the
sick man’s house.…. The priest carries the blessed Sacrament in a monstrance
(as described in appendix for reservation in both kinds), or he will convey it
in the chalice, the Holy Body being placed previously

therein by him, soaked in a few drops of the precious Blood, the
chalice being covered with a white veil, and burse, with a corporal folded
inside.”—The Ritual of the Anglican Clergy, p. 23.

10. They pray for the souls of the Dead, and they declare their
belief in Purgatory, and in the power of the priest to relieve from its
penalties;17 whereas our Church declares purgatory to be “a fond thing, vainly
invented, and grounded on no warranty of
Scripture, but rather repugnant to the Word of God.” (Art. xxii.)

17 “What seems to be agreed upon is
:—That, meantime, the souls of those persons are benefited by the prayers and
Offerings of the Church, and by Alms given in their behalf; that those who have
not died beyond the pale of salvation receive mitigation of their sufferings
and ultimate release; and that, possibly, those who are lost also gain a
mitigation of their sufferings, which mitigation may last through Eternity.”
—Article on Purgatory in Tracts for the Day edited by Rev. O. Shipley, p. 29.

The souls of the departed thus abiding in their place of rest may be
the subjects of prayer to those who are still alive upon the earth,” because
“the souls that are departed are not in their perfection.’—Church’s Broken
Unity, by Rev. W. J. E. Bennett, p. 122.

“Accept this Sacrifice, which, to the honour of thy Name, we have
offered for the faithful, both living and departed, and for all is our sins and
offences.”—Altar Meal. p.36.

“The state of the departed souls, whether in pain or pleasure, is
not yet final. The truth is that they are in custody, easy or harsh, awaiting
“Trial.”

“The best and holiest men (and much more the average believers)
leave this world bearing the stains of earthly sins and error, which must be
cleansed somewhere before they can be fitted for heaven.”—Prayer for the Dead,
by Rev. Dr. Littledale, p. 2.

See Dr. Pusey’s Address, headed, “The prayers for departed
Companions of the Society of the Love of Jesus.”—p. 127, 8.

Also notices at the doors of Ritualistic Churches, “Of your Charity
pray for—,” and then fo llow the names of persons sick and dead.

11. They omit the Prayers for the Queen, the Royal Family and
Parliament,18 and are agitating for a separation of Church and Sate.19

18 In Ritualistic Churches the State
Prayers are generally omitted.

“There does not seem to be any great reason for retaining the prayer
for the Queen, bearing in mind the very full and emphatic terms in which her
Majesty is mentioned in the Canon. Most people, we suspect, would be
exceedingly glad if this prayer, as well as the Comfortable Words and the Addresses
were dropped.”— Church Times, Jan. 20, 1866.

19 “I referred to an extreme faction
in the Church of very modern date that does not conceal its ambition to destroy
the connection between Church and State.”—Letter from the late Premier to Rev.
A. Baker, dated 9th April, 1863.

See Rev. W. J. E. Bennett’s Sermon at Bristol, on May 2, 1869
advocating the separation of Church and State, and speaking of their connection
as an adulterous love between the kingdom of the world and the kingdom of God.
—Ch. Times, May 7, 1869.

12. They also introduce the Romish practices of Extreme
Unction,—Incensing persons and things,— Substituting wafers for bread at the
Communion Service,’—Using Holy Water,—Consecrating and censing Palm branches on
Palm Sunday, —Consecrating ashes, and rubbing them on persons’ foreheads on Ash
Wednesday,—Censing candles and sprinkling them with Holy Water on Candlemas
day.

See Essay on “ Unction of the Sick “ in Tracts for the day edited by
Rev. O. Shipley, where the writer speaks of “the Sacrament of Unction” p. 342,
and adds (p. 359)

“The principal effect then of Unction is the removal of the relics
of Sin; its consequential effect, the remission of the guilt of any Sin it may
find in the soul.”

“The recognized consecration of chrism and holy oil for various
rites cannot be much longer postponed. It will certainly come in somehow”—Dr.
Littlerdale's Letter to the Archbishop on “Catholic Revision.” p. 28.

Liturgy of Church of Sarum dedicated by permission to Bp. of
Salisbury.

13. They advocate the Procession and Veneration of Relics.

See instructions for Procession and Veneration of Relics in Oratory
Worship.

“It is well, when the relics are to be exposed, to erect a
resting-place for them just within the chancel, or in some place calculated to
facilitate the veneration of the faithful,” p. 32.

Then follow details of the service, and it concludes by saying,
“After the Te Deum the officient and his ministers should proceed to the
chancel gates, and there hold the inner relic-case to be kissed by the
faithful, wiping the glass after each osculation with a piece of cotton
wool”.—p. 34.

14. They encourage and enjoin habitual auricular confession to
a priest, and seek to restore Judicial Absolution by a Priest, and the Romish
Sacrament of Penance;20 whereas our Church says, “to maintain their auricular
confession withal they greatly deceive themselves and do shamefully deceive
others.” “It is most evident and plain that this auricular confession hath not
the warrant of God's word.”—Second part of homily on Repentance.

20 Mr. Dodsworth, writing to Dr.
Pusey, eighteen years ago, says :—” Both by precept and .example you have been
amongst the most earnest to maintain Catholic principles. By your constant and
common practice of administering the Sacrament of Penance; by encouraging
everwhere, if not enjoining, auricular confession, and giving special priestly
absolution, &c.

Mr. Maskell, addressing Dr. Pusey about the same time, wrote, “He
(Mr. Dodsworth) knew that you have done more than encourage Confession in very
many cases; that you have warned people of the danger of deferring it, have
insisted on it as the only remedy, have pointed out the inevitable dangers of
the neglect of it, and have promised the highest blessings in the observance,
until you had brought penitents in fear and trembling upon their knees before
you.”

Dr. Pusey, in a Letter to the Times Nov. 29th, 1866, says: “During
the twenty-eight years in which I have received Confession, I never had once to
refuse absolution.”

In the “Ordinance of Confession” the Rev. W. Gresley, MA .,
Prebendary of Lichfield, has given very minute directions both to penitent and
confessor. He also says that the priest when he hears confessions, should wear
his robes of office and then at p. 96 he speaks thus about absolution:—

“The giving Absolution is not a matter of course, but is dependent
on the judgment of the priest.

He has power to retain as well as remit sins—to give absolution or
refuse it.” Awful thought!

“Listen carefully to all the Priest says to you, be sure to remember
the penance he gives you, and receive the Absolution thankfully.”—Little Prayer
Book, p. 83.

“The essential form of Absolution is not to be put forth after the
manner of a prayer, but as by authority, being a judicial act.”—The Priest in
Absolution, p. 50.

“Confession is one of the lesser Sacraments, instituted by our Lord
Jesus Christ by means of which those sins which we commit after Baptism are
forgiven,” &c.— Prayer Book for the Young, p. 71.

15. They are restoring Monasteries and Convents.

The Rev. J. T. Lyne (Father Ignatius) has established a Monastery at
Laleham, a Convent of Sisters of St. Benedict in London; and there are convents
of Benedictines in London, Newcastle, and Norwich, and a Priory of Benedictine
nuns at Feltham.

“The Rev. R. M. Benson, MA., Incumbent of St. John the Evangelist,
Oxford, and a prominent member of the High Church party (Ritualistic?) in that
city, has been holding a ‘Retreat’ at his Monastery in Marston-street, Oxford,
which has been attended by a large number of clergymen from all parts of the
United Kingdom. During its continuance the brethren, as they are called, give themselves
up to fasting and prayer, maintaining the strictest silence and reserve. The
Services in the chapel attached to the Monastery are incessant, the members of
the Brotherhood appearing to spend the whole of their time between prayers in
the chapel and meditations in their cells. The whole of the brethren are
clothed in long black cassocks, confined at the waist by a cord, and wear large
black felt hats.”— Morning Advertiser, Oct. 1869,

See account of service at what is called the Feltham Nunnery, quoted
is the Guardian, September 9th, 1868 in which it is stated that—

“The Priest commenced with the Communion Service of the Church of
Eng land, the young lady who was to receive the veil was dressed as a bride.
The novice’s habit, scapular, girdle, and sandals, wimple and cloak, were
solemnly blessed, her long black hair was all cut off, her white dress changed
for a Benedictine frock, the white veil solemnly blessed and incensed, and then
placed over her head, and she took the three vows for one year. The nuns are
entirely enclosed, never go out, only see visitors at a grating in the Convent
parlour, and then their faces are covered, and they obey the strict Benedictine
rule.”

In the same account it is stated that in a previous week a nun took
the black veil in the house with ceremonies still more striking and solemn.

16. They recommend the celibacy of Priests.

“All Catholics who seriously desire the spiritual well-being of our
Church ought earnestly to long to see some such discipline as that which
prevails in the Holy Eastern Church established among ourselves—to have some
stringent law or Canon enacted making the reception of at least Priest's Orders
a bar to subsequent marriage on pain of perpetual irregularity.”—Church News
Oct. 13th, 1869.

The Rev. W. Humphrey in an essay, “The Three Vows” in The Church and
the World, enjoins the necessity of the three vows of Chastity, Obedience, and
Poverty, and says, “Perpetual continence is requisite in order to the
perfection of Religion.”—p. 517.

“We are perfectly convinced that until the celibate life for men,
and especially for priests, is very widely recognized and practised among us,
we shall be lacking in an important feature necessary to the perfection of a
Christian Church.”—Church News, April 7th, 1869.

17. They deny the sole authority of God’s Word. For its
supremacy, they substitute the traditions of the dark ages, introduced by an
ambitious priesthood, to enrich and aggrandize their order.19

With a clear note, our Church rebukes those views, declaring that
“Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation” (Art. vi.); and
that “while each Church has the right and the power to decree ceremonies”—(Art.
xx.)—“it is not lawful for the Church to ordain anything that is contrary to God’s
Word written;” and “whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby,
is not to be

required of any man, that it should be believed as in article of the
Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation.” (Art. vi.)

19 “If all the Bibles in the world
could be gathered together tomorrow into one place and cast into the sea, I see
nothing to hinder the Christian mission spreading in the world, in the same way
as it spread between tine years 33 and 80 A.D.. (or whatever date may be
assigned for the completion of the New Testament Canon). Neither, to take a
practical case, which involves no such extravagant hypothesis, do I think that
a Christian Priest, sent to a heathen land to win converts to the Faith, has any
need to take a Bible with him, or any call to use it with the heathen previous
to their baptism, or in any sense to treat it as a necessary element in the
work of conviction.”—Kiss of Peace. Sequel 59.

“In the sense in which it is commonly understood at this day,
Scripture, it is plain, is not, on Anglical principles, the Rule of
Faith.”—Tracts for the Times, No. 90, p. 11, republished with Preface by Dr.
Pusey, 1865.

“There are a great many persons who are under the impression that
the Bible is intended to teach us our religion. Let me say most distinctly and
definitely that this is a thorough mistake.”—An Open Bible. Lecture by Rev. J.
E. Vaux, p. 18.

“If we would decide between conflicting opinions on fundamental
doctrines, we must appeal to the Universal Church. Her voice will tell us ‘What
is Truth.’”—Ib. p. 17.

The Church is not the Church of the Rome, but the Bible is the Book
of the Church.”—Ibid. p. 15.

18. Even on the Primacy of the Pope, which by acts of
Parliament and by the Order of our Reformed Church was rejected, these men are
now approaching Popery with their entreaties. They set up Associations to
promote reunion with Rome: they desecrate public worship by prayers for it;
they hail the Papal Council; they declare the identity of our Articles with the
Papal Creed; and the language, in which some of their leaders have lately expressed
themselves, leaves no doubt as to their design. In St. Alban’s, Holborn, Dr. Littledale,
accompanied by three other Priests, asked all present to pray.

“That Pentecostal fires might descend upon that great Council which
was about to assemble under the chief Bishop of the Church, so that some of the
scandals of the last 300 years might be removed.”

One of their organs expressed plainly the sentiments of the party:

The cry of the earnest and devout in our Communion to the successor
of St. Peter is ‘Come over and help us.’ Will he stop his ears and beat back
the hands stretched towards him, or will he advance half way and fall on our
neck and kiss us? We are quite content to allow that we have been, as a Church,
separate, degraded by the State to keep swine, and famished on the husks it has
cast to us, but we do not forget that we are sons.”—Church News, Sept. 15,
1869.

We cannot wonder that in a Roman Catholic newspaper, a letter from
an Ecclesiastic of high position is given, which states:—

“It is notably impossible for the Holy Father and the Council to
ignore the reunion with the Holy See expressed by so many pious Anglicans.”
From information “received from Catholics in England, from Archbishop Manning
downwards,”— “the present spirit of the more advanced Anglicans is all that could
be desired.”— Weekly Register, Sept. 4.

Therefore, it is no exaggeration to describe the Ritualistic party
as Romanists, who have reached already with bold advance the worst errors and
idolatries of the Church of Rome. The conspiracy now is organized, its practice
open, its purpose avowed. To unprotestantize our Church and to overthrow our
reformed faith is their deliberate and unconcealed design. Nor is the evil or
the danger small; in some cases the laity have been corrupted by their teaching
and have imbibed Romish errors, but the great majority of our laity are shocked
and startled to find.

Lutheran

Presbyterian

About Me

Retired. Reformed and Presbyterian by background, but dedicated to the Anglican Prayerbook with degrees from Presbyterian and Episcopal seminaries. Informed by both traditions. Not giving up the 1662 BCP for the Presbyterians and not giving up the Westminster Standards for the Anglicans.